‘The Avengers’ Spoilers Discussion

Published 2 years ago
by
Vic Holtreman
, Updated September 18th, 2012 at 8:08 am,

While our readers are already talking about this movie in the comments section of our Avengers review, this is the place where you can discuss The Avengers spoilers without concerns about ruining the movie for folks who haven’t seen it yet.

We would HIGHLY RECOMMEND you avoid reading the comments here until after you have seen the film.

If you’re posting comments here, assume that anyone in the conversation has seen the movie – if you haven’t seen the movie, we would recommend you don’t read the comments here until you have.

We’ve set up a poll below where you can rate The Avengers for yourself. Other than that, feel free to discuss the film and all its awesomeness!

Since I’m the only one who isn’t positively gushing about the movie I’ll be the voice of reason and go on a rant about how bad this movie is.

1. Was the Tesseract ever actually explained? All that was said about it was that it was powerful and then about half way through we learn that it was found in the ocean and that they plan to make weapons out of it.

2. The aliens weren’t explained very well either. Especially that really big random alien that they have to fight. The aliens were just filler. It was like they spent 1 minute on plot for like every 5 minutes they spent on killing non important aliens. Seriously it took like 30 seconds to kill that really big alien once they actually put forth some effort into killing it.

3. Hawkeye stopped being controlled by Loki way to easily. Really the best you could come up with was that he got hit on the head really hard. It was just pathetic writing. Same thing when Professor Selvig was uncontrolled just enough to put in a safeguard on the portal machine.

4. Bruce Banner also gained control over his Hulk side way to easily. Whenever he transforms hes supposed to be an uncontrollable rage machine. In the end battle all he had to say was “The secret is I’m angry all the time” and hes suddenly able to have full control over his hulk side. Like WTF?

5. Agent Coulson brings out a special gun made especially to hurt Loki. The gun is used exactly once and its just to make a terrible one liner that I literally said right before Coulson did. If they did have to put the gun in then it would have been better writing if a hero like Black Widow who doesn’t have any powers ended up using it.

6. Also Agent Coulson’s death was rather lack luster. Oh his unsigned Captain America trading cards had blood on them. I’m so distraught. Exactly why would The Avengers care about some random agent dieing? I think Peppers Potts was the most emotionally invested in his character then any of The Avengers were.

7. Loki’s character was underwritten. A few lines about freedom and some simple mind tricks and we’re supposed to fear him? Uh, I don’t think it works like that. Hes totally weak and poses very little threat.

8. The Avengers were never in danger. It was literally a question of how long do you want them to fight pointless throwaway villains before they actually win. I know its not supposed to be a question if The Avengers win or loose but Loki/the aliens never once had the upper hand. In fact it felt like the more imminent threat was The Avengers imploding and not being able to work together. Oh wait the last third of the film is all puppies and sunshine after previously trying to kill each other. This again speaks the lackluster push Nick Furry gave them.

Nitpicking Items: Random stuff like Captain America’s hair not moving while riding a motorcycle or Loki wondering why people won’t obey him when hes clearly speaking English to German people. They also forgot to put innocent bystanders into the film, until they show Hawkeye helping people out of a randomly overturned bus.

so in summation, I think all of these points speak to how they spent more time writing in banter and unimporetant fight sequences versus dialogue and fight sequences that actually developed the plot or explained plot points.

Well… you’ve either not seen the tie-in movies, or you’re one of those people who texts during movies and doesn’t pay attention
Seriously mate, all those things are CLEARLY explained in The Avengers (and the Tesseract is mostly explained in Cap:TFA). I’d recommend you go watch the movie again – pay closer attention this time.

The Tesseract was NOT explained in CA:TFA. All that was said about it was that was “the jewel of Odin’s treasure room”. We all know it as a Cosmic Cube, but since these are Ultimate Marvel movies the mainstream explanation don’t hold weight.

Of course the cube was explained during Cap.
It’s an unlimited power-source and can open portals to other worlds…
It once belonged to Odin, but he hid it on earth so that no one could ever get their hands on it. That plan didn’t work out so well, Red Skull got his hands on it and made weapons using the cube’s power. Cube ended up in the ocean, Stark Sr found it, and he studied it for years (and based the arc-reactor technology on it).

P.S. These aren’t “Ultimate Marvel Movies”. Yes, there are elements from the Ultimates in the movies, but they also incorporate many elements from the mainstream Marvel U in the movies (and add a lot of originality)
The movies are very much their OWN universe – not an adaption of one of the comic universes.

We all know a Cosmic Cube can do that. How did Odin came about having it? How did such a powerful thing end up in almighty Asgard, then end up on medieval Earth? These are Ultimate Marvel movies. Anytime you see a black Nick Fury it’s an Ultimate movie.

lol, these aren’t “Ultimate Marvel” movies. I’ve just told you: yes, they do take elements from the Ultimates (like Nick Fury being an African American), but they also follow the source material of the regular Marvel U.
The Marvel Cinematic Universe doesn’t directly follow one of Marvel’s previously established universes (like the 616 or Ultimates), it is it’s own thing that takes INSPIRATION from BOTH universes and adds new elements as well – not that difficult to grasp mate

As for the cube.. how did Odin get it? Well, how did he get all the other artifacts that were in his vault? – he’s a king (kings have cool stuff). I don’t where he got the cube (I’m guessing he obtained it during some siege on another realm). Maybe we’ll see Odin explaining to Thor how he got the cube in THOR 2… but where Odin got the cube is irrelevant anyway. He hid it on earth so that no one (like the frost giants) could ever get their hands on it to attack Asgard. Unfortunately for earth, red skull obtained it (the poorly hidden cube) and tried to take over the world… we all know what happens after that.

You need watch the others movie, Captain america, Thor, Hulk, Ironman, the Only two guy theft really matters coulson are Cap and Ironman, and the only two guys in the helicarrier the others fall on earth and get mad with Loki, the Widow and Hawkeye get mad for control him, who needs more, for that reason Loki tryng ti control all héroes for figth each
others

Avengers isn’t some advanced level course that requires prerequisites. Those are perfectly valid points and if Marvel wants to require people to invest time and money, than they’ll see diminishing returns (in about ten years or so).

That said, as long as people have some awareness that there were other movies, I think you can “just go with” a lot of stuff. The tesaract is some powerful alien energy source. That’s all you need to know. I’ve seen CA, and I’ve read the comics (where it is like an “anything” machine). I still don’t know what it is. Joss Whedon said he referred to it more-than-once as the McGuffaract (look up McGuffin – it’s a film term).

The aliens are just an army the Avengers fight. They are not human because audiences can accept them being killed and trampled easier. Really, all your issues come from expecting too much complexity from a 2+ hour SH movie. They simply can’t make extra time and pace-slowing dialog, and create sets and props to explain everything. In comics, or maybe a TV series they could.

And how dare anyone question how the Hulk was handled. (Just kidding. That comes up a lot and the popular response is “you didn’t do your homework and review your notes” i.e. watching every other movie closely).

Should people have to see earlier movies of Star Wars to enjoy episode 6? How about Star Trek? Is Trek 2 horrible because I never saw any Trek episode or movie? When my sister asked me about the Avengers, I told her that I seriously suggest she watch the tie-in movies first (especially IM 2 and CA). If I saw LotR: RotK, I’d be extremely confused if I didn’t know anything about the Tolkien stories.

I would suggest that Stuie should have seen the other movies first before watching The Avengers (or, at least, read up on the characters).

Not the same thing. Star Wars is one story. But by all means, skip the first three chapters. They should probably see episodes 4 and 5 in order, and then they can be be as let-down as they like with 6.

If people want to and are willing to see them, and someone recommends them, fine. Do they have to see them? I don’t think so.

Avengers isn’t chapter six of a series. It’s a story that involves some characters and items that were in earlier separate stories. Avengers, by design, isn’t that complicated of a story. I doubt anyone needs to have seen all of the other movies (and plenty haven’t).

LOTR is one book. The movies were conceived as one story and even filmed simultaneously. Every other “trilogy” is really just a string of sequels that have connections that are generally contrived, and maybe based on some preconceived but highly flexible idea.

I don’t, wouldn’t, and can’t recommend any Marvel movie other than the first Iron Man. If Marvel wants to make these movies so connected that audiences have to see them, they’ll see their profits fall as only the most ardent fans will go. Or they’ll just skip the theater and wait to rent (and Marvel will have to hope they do in order to proceed with plans).

During this next build-up I will be more selective about what I go see in theaters.

I disagree with that.
While you don’t NEED to watch IM1, TIH, IM2, THOR, Cap:TFA to know what’s going on in The Avengers, I would still say The Avengers is part of a 6 chapter story (the story being entitled, the Marvel Cinematic Universe).

Couldn’t agree more with you, BLA. Of course there are elements of The Avengers that could have been improved upon. Of course more time could have been spent on any number of plot points. But whatever gripes I might have about this film – and they are minimal and comparatively inconsequential – it was one of the most exciting cinematic experiences of my life (and I write that as one who has, largely, been disappointed with the other Marvel-Movie offerings). The Avengers was hugely entertaining, rippingly engaging, periodically inspiring, funny, well-paced, well-acted, visually stunning. Perfect? Of course not. But a great, great, great movie on every level.

uhm excuse me buddy you obviously are looking for attention because ive poked huge holes in all your logics for example Banner in incredible hulk at the end showed how he gained control of the beast when norton opened his eyes and they were gamma green. The aliens were chitari aliens that were given to loki so they dont need a backstory they are an army point blank shall i continue proving you worng?

Great points! Your point about Hulk and the reason the avengers are avenging were the two things that did not impress me either. I think in the beginning when Bruce Banner turns into “the other guy” they did a good job with his introduction. His transformation was pretty quick, but then again it is a movie and not a comic book series, I think that’s what makes it hard trying to develop big name characters.

And of course that scene with Loki and Phil, first name “Agent” could have taken a shot at Loki with a normal gun. They could have made the audience hate Loki more if more people had died. But not to worry Thanos is coming! And he better have a better entrance and a far more sinister side than Loki.

I don’t know if this was talked about already,i don’t have the time like i use to have to go through all the comments but it seemed like the aliens were too easily defeated by the Avengers.Sure we know Thor,Hulk,and Iron Man can hold their own but Cap,Hawk,and Widow should’ve had a harder time.They were aliens warriors for crying out loud.And when Banner admitted he tried to kill himself but it didn’t work,i don’t understand how a bullet in his head doesn’t harm him when he’s in normal form.Just some thoughts i had.

Not that I’d know, but I would think the whole process of getting a gun, loading it, and putting it in your mouth might be stressful. Yes, that is a quick transformation, but… it’s a movie. (BTW that premise was used in the Banner miniseries).

Well in some incarnations when Bruce Banner is killed his body morphs into the Hulk and when he morphs back it rejuvinates Bruce Banner. It happened in the 2008 Incredible Hulk movie when he jumped out of the helicopter and crashed into the ground. It killed Bruce Banner but he still changed into the Hulk.

The movie was about the members becoming a team; the aliens are just there as fodder. And like the others said, the Hulk comes out when Banner is stressed beyond his control; also remember, this is sci-fi/fantasy.

No one ever said the aliens are all powerful…
That’s a little racist in soem respect
Just because you’re dealing with aliens, doesn’t mean they can’t be harmed by bullets, it doesn’t mean you can’t snap their necks – they can harmed/killed. Loki’s/ The Other’s play was to invade the earth with mass numbers of aliens.
The big guns were the Leviathans… but the aliens were only fodder.

As for Banner: I agree with Nostalg-O: I think one’s heart would start racing and emotions (like fear and anger) would take over when you’re trying to kill yourself.

Yes I’ve seen all of the previous movies. Aside from maybe my first point I think the movie really dropped the ball. Take point 3 for example. Hawkeye was controlled by loki because he touched his heart with the scepter. So why would a hit to the head suddenly make him uncontrolled? It seems just like a cop out for the writers. Same thing with Banner gaining control of his Hulk side and the portal machine having a safeguard. It just seems too convenient. Also the fight sequence were so random. Instead of having a climactic battle (either with the big alien or loki) they mostly just beat up the unimportant aliens. I mean people are gushing over this movie like it has no flaws when it clearly does. Seriously go back and watch The Dark Knight to remind yourself what a good superhero movie is.

Okay…
1. It’s explained in Cap:TFA. The tesseract is an ancient artifact hidden on earth by Odin. Red Skull gets his hands on it, Cap beats Red Skull, Stark Sr recovers cube, and for hte past few years he studies it. In the cinematic universe, the cube is a power source. It can also apparently open portals to other realms.

2. The aliens are explained perfectly… their bad guys! Minions sent to earth to invade earth. Really can’t see your beef with the explanation.

3. It’s called cognitive re-calibration. Getting “hit on the head real hard” is actually how many people who suffers from amnesia recovers their memory. I’ll admit, it was a bit of a cop-out, but it’s still a valid explanation. (Definitely not something that detracted from the movie)

4. (This is why I’m thinking you didn’t pay attention to the movie) in the hellicarier he transformed due to a survival instinct from the Hulk (remember how they fell? the attack on the Hellicarier). Loki messing with The Avengers’ mind caused Banner to not have control of the Hulk when he came out. Later, on the battlefield, Banner was calm and Loki wasn’t messing with his head so he was able to transform and have some control over the “other guy”.

5. Don’t even know what your gripe is there… Coulson doesn’t have any powers, so it makes perfect sense that he used a weapon (a weapon based on the Destroyer). Coulson didn’t know how to use it, and before he could pull the trigger, Loki stabbed him. Coulson then distracted Loki with some clever dialogue and shot him with the weapon. Couslon is a bad@$$ and that was a great scene IMO.

6. [facepalm]. If that’s what you thought of Coulson’s death, then I don’t know… there’s no helping you – that was one of the most powerful scenes in the movie.

7. I agree, Loki was underwritten, and he is kind of weak (not a fan of how he was written in TA), but that’s why he needed the army though… Loki couldn’t possibly take on the Avengers alone, so he had lots of help from The Other (and his master, Thanos).

8. The Avengers were definitely in danger lol. Iron Man and Cap couldn’t do any damage to the Leviathan. Thor got stabbed. Hawkeye and Widow (as awesome as they were) would have been killed if not for the big four. The only one who was really invincible was Hulk (but he’s the Hulk – strongest superhero in the Marvel universe so of course he wouldn’t be in danger). As for the other characters, they were very much in danger lol. – but come on! It’s a comic book movie, of course they’d win (if you were expecting some of the Avengers to die or lose, then you don’t really know movies ;))

Wow! Do you even believe most of that? I’m sorry but I have a higher standard for movies. Not saying The Dark Knight is perfect but come on The Avengers isn’t even in the same league. BTW I wasn’t talking so much about why Bruce Banner turned into The Hulk. I was simply talking about the fact that he could control it. On The hellicarier he was uncontrollable. Remember how he was just smashing stuff left and right. Fine Its just a movie. I can suspend disbelief enough for him to be able to turn into The Hulk on command. But even if he is able to control when he turns into The Hulk it doesn’t mean he’d be able to make such calculated attacks. The whole point of The Hulk to be a play on Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide. If The Hulk is no longer and uncontrollable rage machine then you’ve destroyed the very essence of his character.

You do realize that for a LONG period during the comics the Hulk was “smart Hulk” (i.e. banner had FULL control of his alternate personality).
He was uncontrollable on the hellicarier because Loki was making it impossible for Banner to control. On the battlefield, Banner was calM and collected and could thus control the beast TO A certain extent (just like he did at the very end of TIH as well as in countless comics.)

Don’t know why I’m even explaining this to you though… you’re obviously just another “Nolanite” – nothing anybody explains to you will make you see the movie differently. You’re a classic example of one of those delusional people who thinks “Nolan can do no wrong” and “no one’s work can compare to the almighty Nolan”.

Thanks for making my point. None of that was explained in the movie. I would have been fine with everything if they would have explained it more. BTW Christopher Nolan isn’t my favorite director. He just made my favorite superhero movie. Lets face it when you say I’m just fan of Christopher Nolan the reverse could easily be said about you. Either you don’t like Christopher Nolan or you’re just a marvel or Joss Whedon Fanboy.

Nope. I think Chris Nolan is one of this generation’s best directors (he’s made many of my favorite movies), but that certainly doesn’t mean his movies (specifically his batman movies) “aren’t in the same league” as The Avengers. For me, TDK was my favorite superhero movie until The Avengers came along.

Thing is, almost all of your “quips” with The Avengers IS explained during the movie – how do you think I was able to post that long comment explaining your 8 complaints? – I just simply watched the movie (the only thing that wasn’t really explained in the movie was the tesseract).
My recommendation would be to just go watch The Avengers again…
No offense, but I just think you didn’t pay close enough attention when you watched it (which is fair, since there was was a lot going on and i’m sure the audience wasn’t exactly quiet during the movie)…

For all the hype and rave reviews I was expecting a much better movie then what was presented. I paid just as close attention to the movie as you did. The difference is I don’t buy into easy cop out explanations. I don’t buy the Transformers like ending. I respect your opinion. If you like that movie that’s fine but I just think people should actually think about the movie and not just like it because everyone else did. If someone comes away saying THEY liked it because THEY thought it was good then I can respect their opinion. What I don’t get are the mindless drones who really put no thought into the movie at all and just say like it because everyone else did. I’m just offering up a different opinion. Just trying to foster some discussion about the movie.

LOOK PEOPLE. Yes the Dark Knight was amazing and The Avengers was epic. First, Batman is not technically a superhero so its not the best superhero movie. If anything its the best comic book/action thriller movie ever. Now the Avengers is about superheroes so it would be considered by most the best superhero movie ever.

I respect your opinion as well…it’s good to hear a different perspective. I just think when specific issues or points are raised, it’s hugely important to give due consideration when people respond with valid answers that address your points. It feels like you’re dismissing those answers even though they are accurate. Also, I don’t know of anyone who likes the movie just because other people like it. I’ve seen nothing but people expounding about why they like it in great detail, nothing about “it’s popular so I think it’s good. It really seems like you’re unwilling to accept that it can be good even if you don’t like it.

That just makes no sense. If I didn’t like the movie why would I think its good. I have no problem with people liking movies I don’t. I just think that there are inherent flaws in this movie that people are overlooking. I mean it would be different if I just didn’t like superhero movies but I have liked them in the past. For example I don’t care for Horror movies but I’m not gonna say that Cabin In The Woods was a bad movie (BTW also written by Joss Whedon).

Because whether you like a thing or not, or whether it’s objectively good or not, are two separate things. I really dislike postmodern art, but I know of artists in the genre that are really good at what they do.

You can dislike certain things about a film, but recognize that it was executed very well.

The Avenger 2 years ago

I don’t “buy into easy cop out explanations” either.
All the explanations (whether you accept them or not) are VALID and are easy to understand, if given enough thought.
(I think ‘Ken’ said it perfectly)

Every movie has it’s flaws: TDK for example (and as much as I love that movie) had plenty of plot-holes that can’t be explained… even though that’s the case, I still hold that movie in the highest of regards.

It’s fine to have a different opinion, but like ‘Ken’ said, even though you pointed out your quips and I gave valid and accurate explanations for all of them, it seems like you’re just dismissing everything I said without given it a second thought.

1. Not a big issue. We kinda agree that it isn’t explained but shouldn’t have to be if you saw Captain America.

2. I disagree with your assessment. I think it would have enhanced the film if I knew more about the aliens. Especially to establish them as a greater threat.

3. “re-calibration” was just weak writing even if it is a real thing.

4. I felt like The Hulk went from Uncontrollable to Controllable too quickly. They really didn’t give a good explanation in my opinion. Yes as you pointed out they gave one but I wish it would have been done better.

5. My gripe is how they introduced the gun. Coulson says “Loki we’ve been working on this to deal with you” (or something to that affect). It just seems kind of convenient. Then on top of that the only time you ever see the gun is in that scene. If it was made especially to fight Loki why is the gun only used once? Why doesn’t a hero without powers like Black Widow use it?

6. Just because Coulson’s death was supposed to be one of the most powerful scenes in the movie doesn’t mean it was done well. Too me it shows a lack of character development. As I said before, Pepper Potts had more of a connection to agent Coulson then any of The Avengers did. I still don’t understand why they would care so much about his death.

7. This goes back to number 2. If Loki’s army of aliens was so important then they should have been given a better explanation. Instead they came of as a random could have been anything bad guy army.

8. I never said that they were invincible. I said that the movie didn’t establish a great enough sense of danger. You said that Iron Man and Captain America couldn’t damange the really big alien. Iron man shot bombs at him 2 or 3 times. That’s supposed to be proof that they couldn’t destroy him. after 5 minutes of destroying unimportant bad guys Iron man decides to go inside of the big alien. In the span of 30 seconds the alien was killed. Come on yet another cop out. I mean I know its a superhero movie and the good guys always win. It just felt like Loki and his army of aliens were too easy for The Avengers to defeat.

Again, I enjoy your points and your articulation of them. A few things here…

Part of the reason the aliens aren’t explained in depth is to portray the dynamic between them & Loki. They’re hired guns, Loki doesn’t care about them as long as they get him what he wants, and they (including The Other & Thanos) don’t care about him as long as they get what they want.

The lack of “caring” on either side was illustrated wonderfully by the very wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am nature of their presentation to the audience. It’s a story tool that was used very effectively, to my writer mind. You may have wanted more explanation (and I would like it too, I love detail) but I know precisely why it wasn’t done that way.

You mentioned “why would audience members care about Coulson, why would people in the film care that much about Coulson?” It really feels like you’re judging Coulson’s importance or value to people based entirely on his involvement in this film, when the audience & character’s attachment & love for Coulson has come from his involvement throughout the Marvel Studios films.

Anyway…thanks for being explanatory & verbose in your debate. Too many people just get mad or don’t think about why they hold an opinion, and it’s nice to see someone who knows how to make a point without beating the keyboard.

2. I still maintain, we don’t have to know every single detail about the aliens. The opening scene with Loki talking to the Other pretty much established that they’re “a great threat” (dark, seedy backdrop in space. Scary aliens, big serpent-thing lurking around – those are pretty useful tools in establishing the “bad guys” for most movies.)

3. You call it weak writing, I call it a valid explanation (I mean, in TDK, Batman fell off a tall @$$ building and just stood up without any injuries – never explained what happened there. Harvey Dent shot a driver and caused a car, that he was in, to flip over, later that night he was completely fine – no concussion, injuries, etc.). In movies, we just have to accept some things.

4. Almost everyone I know that’s seen the movie knows what happened with the Hulk. There are quite a few people who didn’t know how he went from “Uncontrollable to Controllable”, but if I (and many other people all over the world) was able to understand it in one viewing, then I’m sure others can too. If not, that’s what the internet is for: someone asks the question “Why did Banner Hulk-out on the hellicarrier” and someone will give the explanation I gave..

5. You got a point there… “why didn’t they use the gun later”. Personally, I think it could be that since the weapon is a prototype, it can only fired once, or more likely, it takes a long time to recharge (on the battlefield there were thousands of aliens – a weapon that doesn’t have quick repeated fire won’t be really effective). Also, I’m not sure who would use it… Hawkeye’s expertise is with a bow and arrow (why would he use a gun if he can do better with another weapon), Black Widow’s main expertise is her agility (and carrying around a big gun would surely slow her down – causing aliens to catch her off guard and kill her). It would have been awesome to see Fury use the Destroyer-gun, but he wasn’t there.

6. Stark cared about Coulson (he expressed a lot of emotion when he found out Coulson died. I mean, Coulson has always been there for Stark: IM1, IM2 – in IM2 they talk as if they’re almost buddies – since Coulson first appeared in IM1, they’ve known each other for at least 2 years according to the MCU’s timeline). Thor knew Coulson (they weren’t really friends, but Thor did say he can call him an ally from now on), and Cap cared about his #1 fan (he kind of ignored him at first, but when Coulson died, Cap realized how selfish he was being – he didn’t even sign Coulson’s cards: I’d feel really bad if I ignored a dead man’s last request. I thought Cap & Coulson had great interaction in TA.) Coulson is also a fan-favorite, so his death meant a lot to the fans too.
Plus, his death is the whole reason the Avengers put aside their differences and decided to work together.

7. Loki’s army wasn’t important (that’s the whole thing). They were fodder; merely tools to help Loki in his invasion. That’s the whole reason why an in-depth explanation wasn’t given: because LOKI is the bad guy, but since he isn’t strong enough to take on The Avengers, he needed help. That’s all we need to know – nothing more is needed to understand and follow the main plot of the movie. Before the movie came out, Feige made it perfectly clear that the aliens’ identity and back-story isn’t essential or substantial to the story. All the viewers need to know is there’s an Asgardian “god” who wants to take over the earth. He made a deal with “scary aliens” to give him an army and the means to do so. he comes to earth, gets the thing he needs to bring his army to earth and does so. I can’t see why the aliens’ identity would in any way improve on the story, is all (and I’m guessing Whedon thought the same)

8. Well, that’s the way you see it. Personally, (especially near the end) I could see how the Avengers were starting to get worn out, tired and overpowered by all the invaders (even the Hulk). I compltely disagree that the aliens were “too easy” and I thought the climatic battle sequence was amazing. You feel differently about it, and I respect your opinion…

Kris 2 years ago

Ok guys,
This is a comic book action movie! It’s just good fun.
Dark Knight was a deeper comic book movie, yes, but it’s a different type of movie.
I didn’t go into the Avengers thinking it’s going to be super deep and flawless. It’s a good popcorn movie, in fact to me, it’s one of the best popcorn movies.
Ya sure, they may be a few cop out scenes made to be convenient to the plot, but who cares? Some of these questions are just dumb, it’s not that hard to believe bruce banner can control the hulk or hawkeye’s bump on the head releases him from loki’s spell. Come on, Peter Parker gets bitten by a spider and gets super powers? Or there was no buildings around in spiderman 2 so how did he swing out of there? the answer is who cares, it just doesn’t matter.

This movie was just good fun, so just enjoy it and if you have issues with these little cop outs, then this isn’t your type of movie so just let it go.

tbone 2 years ago

Check out TDK’s subway scene where they transfer Harvey Dent to attract The Joker. you can watch on you tube how it was edited shabbily. Chris Nolan is as good as his movie puts out. Those were the only flaws they pointed out on TDK.

All your arguments against this movie are just as valid as when I made these arguments to people that “good not great” movies like The Crow and The Dark Knight were elevated to “greatness” only because they were related to the death of mediocre but promising young actors have their deaths related to them.

Seriously, watch Ledger’s performance in TDK. It is ludicrous…if he hadn’t died so near the release of the film, everyone would agree that it was “Meh.”

But he died, so his final perfromance became elevated thru tragedy…and so did a very average movie.

Actually, Ledger’s performance is brilliant…subtle and understated. The fact that he was so low-energy, so quiet, so casual in his attitude and behavior is what made him so creepy and sinister. The couple of times he exploded onscreen were, in fact, my least favorite moments (when he ran up to kick and pound Batman at the top of the building near the end of his part of the film, for example); they made him seem crazy and…common.

As for the film, itself, it was very well-written, fantastically acted, and effectively shot. I (and MANY others) say with great certainty that it was a superb film…REGARDLESS of whether or not one of its actors survived the experience.

You’re entitled to your opinion about the film…doesn’t mean you are right and others are not (or vice-versa, of course).

As for “The Crow”, Brandon Lee played the “Eric Draven” role as close to perfect as was possible. While it’s a shame he died (especially in such a tragic and stupid way) during the production, the film still turned out beautifully on its own merits. I easily rate it above “The Avengers” and “Batman Returns” (among others) in terms of its quality and rewatchability.

Ledger’s death had nothing to do with the success of TDK. Everyone was questioning Ledgers performance before TDK came out. Every1 was like “why the hell is Nolan doing this” No1 went to see it cause this man died u idiot! So what happened? the movoie came out and Ledger was a great Joker. But u say he is “meh”…Just u…

“Ledger’s death had nothing to do with the success of TDK.”
Well, that’s not true lol.
Of course his death had an influence over the movie. The death of heath Ledger was huge – it was in the tabloids, on the news, everywhere! – people’s morbid curiosity cased them to go see a movie that they would generally not have cared about that much.

Obviously his death wasn’t the only (or even the MAIN reason for the movie’s success), but saying his death “had nothing to do with it” is definitely incorrect.

Oh and P.S. ScreenRant only has two rules (no personal attacts and no profantity)… and calling someone an !d!ot is one of them – let’s keep things civil.

Dude, evey movie has its flaws, even the all powerful Dark Knight. Like when he saves rachel from falling out the window. He survives that forty story fall without evena scratch. And at the end, how does a guy who trained in all forms of martial arts for six years get trumped by two dogs and a maniac with a crowbar.

lol says the martial arts expert who has fights with Pittbulls!?….I think ur just looking into this way to much. look at it this way …Did Batman really get “trumped”??? I do remember him Bitchslappin the first dog that jumped at him, wich gave the other dog enough time to jump on him, then he was gettin hammered with a crow bar wich can be very distracting ( but he still managed to throw the dog off) then he got up and his radar thing was all jammed wich gave joker the opportunity to smack em again and pinn him…But Batman still got out of the situation and captured Joker….I don’t see this as a flaw. I see it as showing Batman as a real person. Just Human.

Yeah but it does show him as beeing defensless when his gadgets mess up. In all seriousness I think Nolan and company need to work more on the fighting in The Dark Knight Rises. It was real good in Batman Begins but in The Dark Knight it crossed me a slow and not well choreographed.

If anyone has ever looked up Thanos in the Marvel universe. There’s no defeating him. He becomes so powerful. He wants his date with death so the point to where he destroys every living thing in the universe and the universe only to be underwhelmed and undo its destruction. Even galactic villains team up with heroes to try to defeat Thanos an they all lose. If they go that route they will have to acquire a butt load more of heroes

If anyone has ever looked up Thanos in the Marvel universe. There’s no defeating him. He becomes so powerful. He wants his date with death so the point to where he destroys every living thing in the universe and the universe only to be underwhelmed and undo its destruction. Even galactic villains team up with heroes to try to defeat Thanos an they all lose. If they go that route they will have to acquire a bu tt load more of heroes

true, but for the movie version I think (and some have speculated on this thread) that the gauntlet if/when thanos gets it won’t make him god or a universal threat, rather just very powerful like Odin level powerful.

Hi guys, unlike this @Stuie299 I’m not nitpicking or complaining abt this movie but i do ve a point of query like…why would this alien race which landed on earth die instantly when the mothership was blown up?
Unlike machines that may required a control central they are just another species of living creatures. Wouldnt it be better we let some of these aliens cowardly fleet away while still stuck on earth for future installments? Rule #1 on superhero comic movies is not to kill off any potential characters that cld leverage for sequels development; agree?

Regardless that one heck of a cleanup lol thousands of chitauri bodies.. If they are still “alive” then what do u do with them, what would the council or sheild do I wonder. Also, if they dont mention the alien tech at all in iron man or other future movies I’ll be a little dissapointed. i mean advanced alien weaponry etc is just sitting there on earth now.

I love the Dark Knight but recently its been getting overrated. How dare someone say The Avengers is out of league. The Avengers just created its own league that I doubt The Dark Knight Rises will hold up to.

I hope whedon does get to do what he discussed (if he does the sequel). He stated he’d make it smaller and more personal of a movie. We’d get a better idea of his writing abilities at the feature film level. batman and avengers are “superhero” movies, but beyond this, they go about it very differently in tone etc so its kinda pointless or at least difficult comparing them side to side.

I really Don’t think Christopher Nolan wpould be a good choice for an avengers movie…Seriously, how boring would that be? His stuff works for Batman….But for The avengers? No! There are just to many characters to actually fit a GREAT EPIC story that ppl want. Wich is why The avengers is an action movie directed by Joss Whedon. Its so retarded how ppl want some mind blowing story for movies like this. If they put more “story” the movie would be like 4 damn hours. Go read a damn novel or keep up with the comics for an “amazing story”

I agree I don’t think Christopher Nolan would have been a good choice for The Avengers. I guess it was just my expectations going into the film. All the critics were giving it such rave reviews I guess I was expecting more from the movie. Especially given Joss Whedon’s previous witty Scfi efforts like Firefly.

Yeah it’s not a perfect movie, it has a bunch of flaws. I still really liked it, the fun bits and good pacing carried me through the plot inconsistencies. I guess it’s all just a matter of expectations

Has anyone read about Thanos. There’s no defeating this guy. He wants his date with Death, his wanna be woman. According to the ultimate universe, this guy became so -powerful he defeated all heroes and villains who teamed up with heroes to defeat him. The end result was he got what he wanted and destroyed all living things and the universe and was so underwhelmed he undid his destrouction and depowered himself. Where does Marvel take this with Thanos and where the hell was War Machine in this movie, thats where it didnt add up for me

Was the dark knight truly that good? I believe Heath Ledger’s Joker performance was just that good, the fact that he died before the movie came out was a big part in that. Yes it was good, but it wasnt the best ever. This movie is the best comic book movie ever. Seriously, what is the difference between iron man and bat man, both were ridonkulously rich, both lost their parents, both are mortal men. How could they be any different?

Yes, TDK actually WAS (and IS) that good. Just because TA’s fans conveniently ignore or justify all of its flaws (hmmm…isn’t that what they’ve been accusing the “Nolanites” of doing? Very telling…and hypocritical) does not mean it is the end-all-be-all of superhero movie-making.

I gave it a 4 out of 5 because it was indeed a fun, exciting, thrilling summer blockbuster movie experience. Then, once I left the theater, I went back to real life. It left me with no lasting impression other than, “Wow that was fun and cool.” That was also how I felt after leaving “Transformers: Dark of the Moon”. Fortunately, “The Avengers” WAS much better, storywise, than TF3

Similar JLA characters to the Avengers
Superman/Thor-Superman has already beat him. Both are gods, movie standards, both are an advanced alien race.
Orion/The Hulk-Both have anger problems. Orion is just as strong as the hulk, but he is a trained warrior.
Cyborg/Iron Man-S.T.R.I.P.E is the same, but he is JSA. IM beats Cyborg.
General Glory/Captain America-exactly the same as CA, Decided by luck.
Green Arrow/Hawkeye-Both are archers, so it comes down to luck.
any DC spy/Black Widow-Luck again
Both companies have similar characters, so Marvel wins due to popularity. Superman has beaten Thor and Hulk, though.

I thought Cross overs between dc and marvel were not part of any actual story arc. like, they are just “what if” stories. So basically Superman never actually beat thor or hulk. Although I dont see how Thor can beat him (but would be a great fight). As for the Hulk…Well, Doomsday killed superman(yes I do know about Doomsdays background) so, I dont see how Hulk couldn’t kill him.

Comic book Thor beats Superman for one reason. Superman is and has always been weak against any form of magic, and in the comics Thor is a GOD from Asgard and his powers are Godly magic. Superman is just an alien man, albeit with enhanced Kryptonian lineage. Pull him through a portal to Asgard where there is no yellow sun and Superman becomes a punching bag.

I loved TDK, i consider myself a nolanite, but on The dark knight he could have turned off the sonar when he entered the room with the joker. The fall should have injured him. Batman said he was going for Rachel, so why did Gordon go for Rachel. Let’s not talk about the voice. Don’t give lame excuses for thinking one movie is better than another.I’m not going to say which is better, because they both are in my top five favorite movies. Now with all that said(typed), I can’t wait for TDKR.

Well… Thor has been killed in the comics A. LOT.
Superman has only died once or twice if I remember correctly…
Nah, in a one-on-one, I’d say Superman can beat Thor (if neither of them gets the time to prepare – i.e. Thor doesn’t get the chance to go find Kryptonite).
As for Hulk vs Supes? HULK IS STRONGEST THERE IS!

I’ve gotta give it to Supes,even though I’m a huge thor fan. Thor can get tired out if he fights long enough, Superman can keep going as long as he has access to a yellow sun. Although now that I think about it, Thor does have one huge one-up on Supes. Superman is hugely vulnerable to magic, and almost everything about Thor is magic based. Even his physical attributes come from supernatural means: his father was Odin, one of the most powerful Asgardians (a supernatural race) and his mother was Gaea, Elder Goddess (mommy to all gods).

In the Marvel comics, the first supernatural beings on earth were Elder Gods, they all started killing & eating each other & became demons, a few escaped, one of the Elder Gods was Gaea and she became one with the Earth, and later gave birth to all other gods in the Marvel world (greek, norse, etc.)

That’s what I mean when I say she was mommy to all gods. Odin later mated with her to create a son that would someday be stronger than he was. Incestuous sure, but it did the trick.

At the end of the day whom ever wins it totally dependent on how the writer wants it power levels etc on various characters have changed to meet the needs/requirements of the various stories in the past (superman is a great example of wildly varying or rather evolving abilites throughout his run). If squirrel girl can be writtin to have taken down Dr doom, Thanos and other heavy weights in the marvel U, then anything is possible. Lol

Just realized something lol. Iron Mans smart ass remarks can really get on ppls nerves. So, since Green Lanterns power is mainly his own will power to create his whatevers(rocket, shield , boulder, huge fist) just listening to iron man can fuel some1 with rage and this can be really distracting when using will power. And this would make Green Lantern drain his energy.

Is it me or Did Thor not leave Stark with the impression that he could obliterate him if he wanted to. And small arms ammo dont work against Asgardians. I am hoping the bring in the wrecking crew and give a display of the power of Odin, to touching on Odin’s power was a mistake made in the first Thor movie. Enchantress and how she got execuitioner to be her puppy should also be shown. I really dont see a play for red Skull and then giv Thanos about 15 minutes

I really doubt it, with a huge villain like Thanos they’re going to string it out as long as possible to build up anticipation.

Thanos will probably be the major player behind the scenes, trying to steal the infinity gauntlet from Odin’s vault, but he won’t be doing the dirty work. I’ll be interested to see who he recruits to play the bad guys in Thor 2.

It almost seems silly to think that Odin and Thor let alone all the Asgardians cant deal with Thanos. why would they need the Avengers , Capt and anyone else for that matter are nowhere near the power levels of Thor, so how would the avengers defeat Thanos and his goons?

I agree. I’m thinking we’ll see a cameo of Thanos in THOR2, or maybe they’ll just show Loki stealing the infinity gauntlet, but I doubt he’ll be the main villain. I’m pretty sure MS plans on doing the whole “build-up” thing for Thanos:
A cameo here and there, maybe touch on his origin (and his threat level) in a GotG movie (that is, if that movie comes out before Avengers 2), and then in TA2 he’s ready for action.

Just saw the avengers a second time and i stand by what i previously wrote that the scepter was really the mind infinty gem. Now after seeing Thanos again i noticed his right hand when he gets up from the throne is ungloved. You see his bare hand.

It does seem POSSIBLE that it’s the mind gem…blue color, and Loki uses it to brainwash people. My problem with the concept is that it’s stated in the film that the scepter is derived from the cosmic cube’s energy.

Also, Thanos missing a glove just means he already is looking forward to the gauntlet (he already knows about it). Kind if a nice little hint of things to come.

Question: How did The Chitauri/Thanos accomplish sending Loki into/through a Tessaract cube that they didn’t even have? Did Thanos already have a cube of his own – therefore was able to open a portal to another cube? This would also explain how Loki’s scepter was already loaded up with Tesseract energy before he ever stole it. (Or it could very well could just be the mind gem in there. In which case – please see question #1)

Josh Whedon is getting better at writing and directing. This movie far better that Buffy or Firefly. Yes there are a few big plot holes but we are talking about a movie. My wife mentioned after the movie the big plot hole of Loki’s staff. Anyoneone of the main characeters should have found the staff would have locked it up away from Loki. But it is always conveniently always lying around for Loki to find it. Why does Tony Stark not die when hitting the ground going several hundred miles per hour? Most of the super hero comic books ignore the laws of physics. Let’s not get caught up in the supposed reality of the movie and just enjoy it.

The movie is good eye candy. The acting is good. However without Robert Downey and Samuel Jackson, this cold have been really mediocre.

If anyone paid attention, Josh Whedon borrowed heavily from many other movies. Is this bad? It depends on how old you are. If you are over 45, then you have seen most of the fight scenes before. The best parts of the movie were the interactions of the characters. But again there is nothing new about being part of a team or looking after our friends. Anyone remember Toy Story 1,2,& 3?

The Avengers is a good movie. Let’s not overthink it.

I agree with some of the points about the underdevelopment of Loki. But who has time to explore all the Freudian problems of each character.

I enjoyed the movie, of course, but one part I’ve seen nobody mention as cool was seeing Black Widow put on her stinger armbands. The bands even lit up a little.

My question is does anyone know what the bands were doing in the movie since she was still using a mini-Glock in battle. At least one scene seemed to show her using them on a baddie but that would mean they’re melee weapons whereas in the comics, they are ranged weapons. Either that or the bands were one-use only.

Just a tad disappointed her signature weapons were barely touched on. They handled Hawkeye’s signature weapon very, very well by contrast.

But those weapons are big and heavy…
The Widow is agile and fast (it’s the only reason she wasn’t killed on the battlefield).
So if they gave her a machine gun (or maybe even that awesome Destroyer weapon that Coulson had) she wouldn’t have been at her best of abilities…

Unless there was some bad editing, Coulson is an ‘LMD’. (He seemed to be in two places at the same time during the middle of the movie. BTW does anybody have the App to get Jarvis on my iPhone? ~ Stark

The few problems I had were:
1) Banner becoming Hulk on whim at the end. He just morphed instantly which came off very rushed and sloppy. Fail.
2) I like Ruffalo, really, but yet again we have another actor who simply doesnt live up to the Bixby benchmark. It would help if one of these Banner actors at least tried to come off like a scientist.
3) Not enough Cap. I thought he was the leader although it was Stark who came off like the leader, the scientist, the main guy basically.
4) They wasted the emotional impact of Coulson’s death by having Jackson say he fibbed about the cards. Man that almost brought a tear to my eye and then they pull back and ruin it. Huge huge fail.

What I did like was the humor. Hulk punching Thor had me rolling, it reminded me of Eddie Murphy being punched by Nick Nolte in the car in 48 Hours. Hilarious.

And the guy who played Loki is brilliant – I would go as far as saying without Hiddleston’s remarkable depth in his role, the movie might not have even worked.